A phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic study of the oral and the oral/ intravenous administration of menogaril
- 37 Downloads
Thirty-five patients with advanced refractory cancer were enrolled on this phase I study of menogaril administered orally every 4 weeks at dosages ranging from 85 mg/m2 to 625 mg/m2. An additional 12 patients received alternating oral and IV doses of menogaril (250 mg/m2 IV; 250–500 mg/m2 oral) with accompanying blood and urine sampling for pharmacokinetics analysis. Nausea and vomiting were the dose-limiting toxicities at the 625 mg/m2 dosage level; vomiting was inadequately relieved by prophylactic antiemetics at this dosage level. Other toxicities included sporadic leukopenia at all dosage levels; at dosages of 500 mg/m2 and 625 mg/m2, leukopenia < 3000/μl occurred in 7 of 24 patients. Anemia and thrombocytopenia were much less frequent toxicities. Among the patients receiving IV menogaril, peripheral vein phlebitis, leukopenia and anemia were the predominant toxicities. No antitumor responses were observed, yet one patient with nonsmall cell lung cancer experienced a 30% reduction in metastatic tumor nodules.
For the patients receiving alternating oral and IV menogaril, comparative pharmacokinetic analyses were performed by HPLC. After oral administration, maximum plasma concentrations were achieved in an average of 6 hours; maximum plasma concentrations were less than one-quarter of those achieved after intravenous administration. The harmonic mean (±SD) terminal disposition half-life after oral dosing was 29.3 ±9.2 hours; mean systemic bioavailability was 33.6±10.5% after oral dosing. Forty-eight hours after an oral dose, mean cumulative urinary excretions of menogaril and the primary metabolite, N-demethylmenogaril, were 4.00±0.96% and 0.44±0.16%, respectively.
Because of the poor tolerance of oral menogaril and minimal evidence of biological activity, this schedule of drug administration is not recommended for phase II evaluation. Based on this and other published studies of oral menogaril, frequent chronic low-intermediate dosages of the drug may be given orally with potentially better tolerance and antitumor activity.
Key wordsmenogaril phase I pharmacokinetics
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Bhuyan BK, Smith CG: Nogalamycin.In Sartorelli AC, and Johns DG (eds) Antineoplastic and Immunosuppressive Agents (II). Springer Verlag, New York, 1975, pp 623–632Google Scholar
- 3.Krueger WC, Pschigoda LM, Schpok SLF, Moscowitz A, McGovren JP, Neta P, Merritt MV, Li LH: The interaction of nogalamycin and analogs with DNA and other biopolymers. Chem-Biol Interactions 36:1–18, 1981Google Scholar
- 4.Li LH, Murch LL, Wooden JM, Krueger WC, Pschigoda LM: Inhibition of DNA and RNA polymerases by nogalamycin and its analogs. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 19:30, 1978Google Scholar
- 5.Clinical Brochure for Intravenous and Orally Administered Tomosar SP in the Treatment of Cancer. The Upjohn Company, December 1986Google Scholar
- 10.Zimet AS, Ohnuma T, Perlow L, Coffey VA, Holland JF, Goldsmith MA: A phase I trial of menogaril (7-con-0- methylnogaril) in a daily × 3 schedule. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 26:167, 1985Google Scholar
- 12.Stewart DJ, Maroun J, Verma S: Phase I study of onceweekly IV menogaril. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 28:189, 1987Google Scholar
- 14.Gibaldi M, Perrier D (eds): Pharmacokinetics. Marcel Dekker, New York, 1982, p 212Google Scholar
- 15.Pang KS: Metabolite pharmacokinetics: The area under the curve of metabolite and the fractional rate of metabolism of a drug after different routes of administration for renally and hepatically cleared drugs and metabolites. J Pharmacokin Biopharm 9:477–487, 1981Google Scholar
- 16.Dodion P, DeValeriola D, Crespeigne N, Peeters B, Wery F, van Berchem C, Joggi J, Kennis Y: Phase I clinical trial of oral menogaril administered on three consecutive days. Acta Oncolog 27:517–520, 1988Google Scholar
- 17.Stewart DJ, Verma S, Maroun JA, Robillard L, Earhart RH: Phase I study of oral menogaril administered on a once weekly schedule. Invest New Drugs 8:43–52, 1990Google Scholar